Comments on: The Comic’s Challenge http://www.neptunuslex.com/2009/05/10/the-comics-challenge/ The unbearable lightness of Lex. Enjoy! Sun, 21 Mar 2010 17:02:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Michelle http://www.neptunuslex.com/2009/05/10/the-comics-challenge/comment-page-1/#comment-364665 Michelle Thu, 14 May 2009 12:06:32 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=9462#comment-364665 Scott, I never heard the reference to passing through the eye of a needle as meaning anything other than a sewing instrument. The rest of your comment I agree with but a wall? What's that all about? Scott, I never heard the reference to passing through the eye of a needle as meaning anything other than a sewing instrument. The rest of your comment I agree with but a wall? What’s that all about?

]]> By: Michelle http://www.neptunuslex.com/2009/05/10/the-comics-challenge/comment-page-1/#comment-364664 Michelle Thu, 14 May 2009 12:00:52 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=9462#comment-364664 Max, Max, Max ... If you're going to interpret the Tenth Commandment that way, then how are you going to interpret the <strike>various</strike> numerous admonitions throughout the Bible that follow the theme of taking care of the windows and orphans among you? Isn't there even something about being your brother's keeper? Sure, you could interpret them as admonitions to us as private individuals and say that nowhere does it make this the government's job, but then again we could argue the same thing about the Tenth Commandment, couldn't we? I'm just not so sure that you can be that sure that God's intent was to tell those who favour redistribution of wealth, government programs and government regulation to go to hell. Perhaps we should ask Him directly? Max, Max, Max …
If you’re going to interpret the Tenth Commandment that way, then how are you going to interpret the various numerous admonitions throughout the Bible that follow the theme of taking care of the windows and orphans among you? Isn’t there even something about being your brother’s keeper?

Sure, you could interpret them as admonitions to us as private individuals and say that nowhere does it make this the government’s job, but then again we could argue the same thing about the Tenth Commandment, couldn’t we?

I’m just not so sure that you can be that sure that God’s intent was to tell those who favour redistribution of wealth, government programs and government regulation to go to hell. Perhaps we should ask Him directly?

]]> By: Scott http://www.neptunuslex.com/2009/05/10/the-comics-challenge/comment-page-1/#comment-364662 Scott Thu, 14 May 2009 11:52:04 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=9462#comment-364662 Skippy -- that passage isn't to condemn those who have wealth -- a common mistake . It <strong>is</strong> to serve as a warning against the self importance that frequently comes with riches. The "eye of the needle" reference is to a passage through walls -- not to a sewing instrument. It was possible for a camel to pass, just took a lot of effort. That is reflected in the passage that follows -- the disciples ask, who can meet that standard? Jesus replies, "With man it is impossible, but with God, all things are possible." It was an admonition to the self reliant, to acknowledge the source of their wealth, which would enable them to enter the Kingdom of God. Protestant teaching. :) Skippy — that passage isn’t to condemn those who have wealth — a common mistake . It is to serve as a warning against the self importance that frequently comes with riches. The “eye of the needle” reference is to a passage through walls — not to a sewing instrument. It was possible for a camel to pass, just took a lot of effort. That is reflected in the passage that follows — the disciples ask, who can meet that standard? Jesus replies, “With man it is impossible, but with God, all things are possible.” It was an admonition to the self reliant, to acknowledge the source of their wealth, which would enable them to enter the Kingdom of God.

Protestant teaching. :)

]]> By: MaxDamage http://www.neptunuslex.com/2009/05/10/the-comics-challenge/comment-page-1/#comment-364612 MaxDamage Thu, 14 May 2009 06:17:57 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=9462#comment-364612 Skippy, I'd like to counter with the Ten Commandments, as I recall them via commentary via P.J. O'Rourke. His is the best I've read, so I quote without permission: "And then there is the Tenth Commandment. 'Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbor's.' The Ten Commandments are God's basic rules about how we should live — a brief list of sacred obligations and solemn moral precepts. The first nine Commandments concern theological principles and social law. But then, right at the end, is 'Don't envy your buddy's cow.' How did that make the top ten? What's it doing there? Why would God, with just ten things to tell Moses, choose as one of those things jealousy about the starter mansion with in-ground pool next door? Yet think how important the Tenth Commandment is to a community, to a nation, indeed to a presidential election. If you want a mule, if you want a pot roast, if you want a cleaning lady, don't be a jerk and whine about what the people across the street have — go get your own. The Tenth Commandment sends a message to all the jerks who want redistribution of wealth, higher taxes, more government programs, more government regulation, more government, less free enterprise, and less freedom. And the message is clear and concise: Go to hell." Seems to me the Good Book clearly indicates the way for the poor to advance is via effort rather than taxing one man's bread and giving it away as welfare to another. Or did I mis-read that commandment? - Max Skippy, I’d like to counter with the Ten Commandments, as I recall them via commentary via P.J. O’Rourke. His is the best I’ve read, so I quote without permission:

“And then there is the Tenth Commandment. ‘Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbor’s.’

The Ten Commandments are God’s basic rules about how we should live — a brief list of sacred obligations and solemn moral precepts.

The first nine Commandments concern theological principles and social law. But then, right at the end, is ‘Don’t envy your buddy’s cow.’ How did that make the top ten? What’s it doing there? Why would God, with just ten things to tell Moses, choose as one of those things jealousy about the starter mansion with in-ground pool next door?

Yet think how important the Tenth Commandment is to a community, to a nation, indeed to a presidential election. If you want a mule, if you want a pot roast, if you want a cleaning lady, don’t be a jerk and whine about what the people across the street have — go get your own.

The Tenth Commandment sends a message to all the jerks who want redistribution of wealth, higher taxes, more government programs, more government regulation, more government, less free enterprise, and less freedom.

And the message is clear and concise: Go to hell.”

Seems to me the Good Book clearly indicates the way for the poor to advance is via effort rather than taxing one man’s bread and giving it away as welfare to another.

Or did I mis-read that commandment?

– Max

]]> By: Skippy-san http://www.neptunuslex.com/2009/05/10/the-comics-challenge/comment-page-1/#comment-364276 Skippy-san Wed, 13 May 2009 01:00:49 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=9462#comment-364276 QM, So there is no chance , whatsoever-that they want to do something good with their money? I'll defer to your thinking on Soros-but maybe Buffet might be on to something? He did not get to a gazillionaire by being stupid. I guess the thing that I do not understand is that -however reprehensible Sykes remarks were, why the conversation always comes back to taxes and government. Seems to me those are two different conversations. I thought we were talking about Wanda Sykes. QM,

So there is no chance , whatsoever-that they want to do something good with their money? I’ll defer to your thinking on Soros-but maybe Buffet might be on to something? He did not get to a gazillionaire by being stupid.

I guess the thing that I do not understand is that -however reprehensible Sykes remarks were, why the conversation always comes back to taxes and government. Seems to me those are two different conversations. I thought we were talking about Wanda Sykes.

]]> By: Quartermaster http://www.neptunuslex.com/2009/05/10/the-comics-challenge/comment-page-1/#comment-364272 Quartermaster Wed, 13 May 2009 00:50:38 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=9462#comment-364272 Have you given any consideration why he said that about the rich man? Have a hard look, a veeeery hard look at Soros, and Buffet. Consider well, since the most of the not so rich have the very same attitudes both of those liberal idiots have. They both got rich off the system, then turn against it, particularly hard in by supporting Barry Soetero, in Buffets case, and criminality with ACORN, in Soros case. The world is not as the liberal likes it, that is a fact. The liberal, however, denies the rest of reality and fights to change things. Like the 2nd law of Thermodynamics, you may push entropy back a bit, but it eventually wins. The victory is much harder when you fight it rather than channeling the forces that cause it. That is the liberal's leading weakness, and they are stupid as they willfully blind on the matter. Have you given any consideration why he said that about the rich man? Have a hard look, a veeeery hard look at Soros, and Buffet. Consider well, since the most of the not so rich have the very same attitudes both of those liberal idiots have. They both got rich off the system, then turn against it, particularly hard in by supporting Barry Soetero, in Buffets case, and criminality with ACORN, in Soros case.

The world is not as the liberal likes it, that is a fact. The liberal, however, denies the rest of reality and fights to change things. Like the 2nd law of Thermodynamics, you may push entropy back a bit, but it eventually wins. The victory is much harder when you fight it rather than channeling the forces that cause it. That is the liberal’s leading weakness, and they are stupid as they willfully blind on the matter.

]]>